I vote for Cnut.
It may seem strange, but this is not the question on everyone’s lips down at the Dog and Duck.
The Prince Regent? Hardly. He was arguably the worst George of the lot.
I’m going with sticking with Charles. He’s been Charles to the nation for so long, we’d never get used to calling him George.
Should his father pass before Charles takes the throne, I could see him choosing Phillip. And I wouldn’t be surprised if that is partly why he won’t discuss it!
I’d go with Aethelwulf II myself.
You make it sound like this is a hypothetical, but it seems highly unlikely that this 93-year-old man will outlive either wife (five years younger, and female) or son. The Wikipedia article on him has fascinating trivia: he is the oldest living great-great-grandchild of Queen Victoria; he was born in a country still using the Julian calendar; he’s a scant two years and 8 months away from the record for longest-lived male descendant of Queen Victoria. I’m not sure how significant that last one is, but it suggests he’s already an outlier in terms of advanced age for his family as well as his species.
That’s cold, man. Funny, but cold.
How much was the taxation policy and other acts that alienated America actively driven by the King, vs. the Establishment and parliament and the government of the day?
I ahd thought that by the time of William and Mary, and from then on, it was more that the elite from parliament called the shots and the King mostly went along and rpovided a guiding hand.
No British monarch has ever used a name other than one of his/her baptismal names. It’s not like the Pope, who takes an entirely new. name.
As well, the custom of having several baptismal names is rather recent. As far as I know, there have only been three monarchs who used a baptismal name other than the one they were commonly known as prior to the ascension: Edward VII (Bertie), Edward VIII (David), and George VI (Bertie).
Elizabeth II, for instance, has been known as Elizabeth her whole life.
I suspect not. There’s only one previous Phillip who was King of England - Phillip II of Spain, who by virtue of his marriage to Mary Tudor was King of England from 1554 to 1558 - is generally regarded as a Bad Guy.
bump:
Or how about “Ethelred the Overly Ready”?
Well, that leaves King Arthur.
Too easily misspelled.
Knute?
With regards to the Albert’s chooising George, as I understand it, one Queen Victoria’s wishes was that no King should be called Albert (out of reverence for her husband, Prince Albert). So far her son, and grandson, have followed her wishes, and Charles would be likely to do so (so Albert’s probably still out as a Regnal name).
He should really go for Arthur … so much more refined than Chuck!
Ah, I think he should just stick with Charles. It’s not like he’s going to have a very long reign anyway and maybe he could help take the taint off the name.
His granny made 101 and his Mum isn’t far off 90. We could see a 20 or 30 year reign if he’s inherited their longevity.
If so, William might be fifty or sixty by the time he inherits the throne, at which time George might be twenty or thirty. And he might not get it until he’s middle-aged as well. (Or if the present queen’s father had lived as long as his wife, he would have been on the throne until about 1997.)
Depending on how old he his and his mental health, there’s always the (very) off chance that he abdicates. It’s unlikely, as that’s not what royals are raised to do, but it could happen.
Mean age at ascent for British monarchs since 1800: 43. (Median age is similar.) If Charles were to ascend tomorrow, at the age of 65, that mean would rise to 45.
And this trend is likely to continue, given contemporary British life expectancy. In the UK life expectancy at age 45 is 34 years for a man, 37 for a woman, so an heir who lives to ascend to the throne at the (current) median age has a good prospect of living beyond 80 - an excellent prospect, given that the royals enjoy middle-class lifestyles, excellent medical care and other circumstances associated with a higher life expectancy. So future monarch can be expected to die typically over the age of 80, and their eldest children would then would not be expected to be much less than 50, unless they marry late.